Parole Reform

“The Case for Parole Reform.” Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 1 September 2009. Web. 8 September 2009 <http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-parole1-2009sep01,0,481912.story>.

Read this article

In this editorial called The Case for Parole Reform, the author is unknown. The author talks about how some people in the state of California are trying to get the parole reform bill off the table because of the recent developments in the Jaycee Lee Dugards story. Dugards was recently found by law enforcement officials after being held captive for eighteen years. She was allegedly kidnapped, raped, and held captive with two girls allegedly fathered by Phillip Garrido and his wife Nancy Garrido. The Garridos have been charged with twenty-nine counts of kidnapping and rape. The author then tells us the history Phillip Garrido has with law enforcement. Garrido was sentenced in 1988 to fifty years in prison. He only served eleven years and was put on federal parole and served an additional eleven years. The parole officer visited the home regularly during each month and never saw anything in the back yard where Jaycee Lee Dugards was held captive. Senator Tom Harman of Huntington Beach was quoted saying, “This demonstrates the problem that we’re going to have if we release thousands of prisoners into our local communities,” to the Sacramento Bee. The author then states that he/she feels the opposite of Senator Tom Harman. The author states the parole reform will help with the budget and also would reduce the ratio between parole officers and parolees. The parole reform would change how California will oversee the parolees. The less violent crimes parolees, such as drug addicts, would not be getting as much supervision as high violent crimes parolees, such as kidnappers, murderers, and rapists. The author tells us that we should not let this case of Jaycee Lee Dugards influence the state of California not to go with the parole reform and that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger should sign the bill.

I partially, agree with the author of this editorial. There is definitely over-crowding in our jails across the country. By releasing inmates after serving half their sentence and put on parole is just how things have to be in today’s time. If this were a “perfect world” inmates would have to spend their entire sentence in prison, but with the over-crowding in prisons I understand why we have to release inmates to go on federal parole after serving half their time with good behavior. However, just like social workers, parole officers have way too much on their hands and something has to be done about it. Drug addicts, which is what the author of this editorial views as less violent parolees, do not need as much supervision as a rapists, murderers, and kidnappers. In my opinion, I feel if someone can rape, murder, or kidnap, there are psychological problems with that person and they are likely to commit the same crime again. On the other hand, I believe that drug addicts need to go into a mandatory rehabilitation center for their drug problem or they might commit a more vicious crime to get the drugs that they think they need in order to survive. There should be something done so that parolees are more supervised than they are now. The parole officer absolutely should have realized that Phillip Garrido was holding someone captive in his back yard. The picture of the house and the tents and shacks where Jaycee Lee Dugards was being held was very disturbing, and the alleged criminals should be prosecuted to the fullest for what they have done to those girls. I think that the editorial should have said more about what the actual stipulations to the parole reform so I can say that I fully agree with the parole reform. However, this article is opening the eyes of people in California and letting it be known that something needs to change. It is making people think about how the parole reform will or will not help the state of California.